Technology-Based Lesson Plans: Preparation and Description

[Pages:12]Informatics in Education, 2010, Vol. 9, No. 2, 217?228

217

? 2010 Institute of Mathematics and Informatics, Vilnius

Technology-Based Lesson Plans: Preparation and Description

Svetlana KUBILINSKIENE , Valentina DAGIENE

Institute of Mathematics and Informatics Akademijos 4, LT-08663 Vilnius, Lithuania e-mail: svetlana.kubilinskiene@itc.smm.lt; dagiene@ktl.mii.lt

Received: November 2009

Abstract. A lesson plan is an important methodological component of the learning process. The key purpose of the article is to analyse the current situation and suggest how the information technologies can assist in the development of lesson plans, their accumulation and retrieval, thus ensuring their effective application. The authors disclose the problems of lesson plan creation and their description as well as make comparative analysis of information and lesson plan templates provided at learning objects storages. The authors identified the main components of lesson plans and their description, based on application of learning objects metadata standard model and the principles for improving the model elements as well as on the results of the analysis made, and proposed the templates for creating the technology-based lesson plans and their description. The development of lesson plans and descriptions will allow educators reuse didactic resources (lesson plans) as an effective learning tool. The storage of didactic resources will allow teachers to use the best practices, and the same learning objects in different learning scenarios. Keywords: technology enhanced learning, lesson plan, lesson plans template, learning object, metadata.

1. Introduction

A lesson plan is an auxiliary teacher`s work for preparing, organizing and conducting a lesson. By preparing for lessons a teacher writes a plan. It includes a topic, objectives, teaching structure, material for independent work of students, their work at separate stages, which students should be checked, etc. (Jovaisa, 1993). Rajeckas (1999) defines a lesson plan as a description of methodically-based lessons.

The lesson plan can be treated as one of the learning object examples. Any digital resource, to be used for teaching, most frequently for learning and applicable in other learning contexts, is usually considered as a learning object (LO) (Dagiene and Kurilovas, 2008; Wiley, 2000). In this paper, we shall use the notions of learning resources and learning objects synonymously (they are used like that in the European Learning Object Metadata Application profiles (LOM AP). In order that a resource might be used again, in another context, it should be related with the data describing the resource, the so-called metadata on the basis of which the work of LO storage is done: searching, generalization,

218

S. Kubilinskiene, V. Dagiene

importing into virtual learning environments and exporting out of them, assembling with other objects and so on (Jevsikova, Kurilovas, 2006).

Lesson plans were used in the education process long ago. Today's contemporary problem is how to present them in educational portals and resource repositories. The electronic learning process differs from the traditional way of teaching: one can use different tools (computer, e-mail, etc.), different types of resources (video or audio records, pictures and the like), work at different time and the like. The training process, in which the traditional teaching methods integrate internet teaching, is known as flexible learning, i.e., ever more popular learning model. Most important it is that this model allows reuse of learning resources (Tate, Hoshek, 2009).

The latest investigation of e-learning show that much time an effort are needed to develop new models, to improve the quality of learning objet and their usage (Slotkiene, 2009; Verbert and Duval, 2004; Verbert et al., 2005). On the other hand, it is no less important to illustrate how learning object are applied in the learning process.

Teachers are developing lesson plan that:

? stimulate teachers to take a deeper look at the everyday teaching process; ? encourage teachers to think of specific needs of each student: proper learning styles

and methods are chosen for planning and specific needs of students are taken into account; ? there is a splendid basis for cooperation of colleagues: teachers can render their experience to beginners teachers, thus encouraging professional improvement; ? stimulate teachers to be innovators and propose new ways of teaching, to test new training aids and strategies for achieving better results; ? help teachers to be fit, to have more confidence in themselves and get the better of problems that may arise in the training process; ? assist in deepening teachers' knowledge and skills: careful lesson planning allows them to get an idea how and what is going on in reality.

Automated lesson planning systems are created however (Kouno et al., 2002; Cheon et al., 2002). These are mostly separate systems that do not follow to the metadata standards and are not meant for sharing the good teachers' experience. It has been noticed that learning object repositories and their search systems can realize the sharing of the good experience, but all that should be properly described.

A description of learning scenarios for sharing the good experience is presented in Roselli and Rossano (2006): the Experiences metadata model (EXM) of 8 categories has been proposed. The generated means enable us to transfer the description into the XML file based on the LOM standard.

The object of this research work is to form a model for lesson plan development and description on the basis of the analysis of scientific publications and storage data of learning resources, in order that pedagogues could reuse didactic resources (lesson plans) as an effective teaching and learning tool. Storage of didactic resources will allow sharing the good experience of different teachers, especially, using the same or similar learning object in different learning scenarios.

Technology-Based Lesson Plans: Preparation and Description

219

2. Exploration of Data in European Learning Objects Repositories

A comparative analysis of information, given in European learning objects repositories, has been made (Table 1). Repositories of different size and purpose are surveyed, and in all of them lesson plans were found. There is one lesson plan repository among them "Virtual trip in the class", well known for the Lithuanian teachers. In Table 1, the analysis of repositories given below is presented (the numbers of repositories correspond to that present in the heading of the table).

Table 1 Information on lesson plans stored in repositories

Information and representation form LO repositories

Metadata elements

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Identifier number

+-+------+

Title

++++++++++

LO Language

++--------

Description

++++++++--

Keyword

++---+----

Aggregation Level

------+---

Contributors

++++++++++

Metadata language

+---------

Format

-+--+--+--

Size

----+-----

Location

+++-+-+---

Technical requirements

--+-+-----

Materials required

-----+---+

Learning Resource Type

+++---+---

Educational context

++--------

Age Range

+-+---+---

Grade Level

---+++-+++

Typical Learning Time

------+--+

Educational Description/Objectives + - - - - - + - - -

Assessment

------+---

Prior Knowledge

------+---

Expectations

------+---

Scope

------+---

Copyright and Other Restrictions

+++--+-+--

Relation

--+--+++--

Classification (subject)

+-++++++++

Classification (Curriculum)

-------+--

Representation form of lesson plan

Attached Lesson plans file or link

+++++++---

Web lesson plan

-----+-+++

Usage of template

----++-++-

220

S. Kubilinskiene, V. Dagiene

1. CALIBRATE: . 2. National Science Digital Library: . 3. Digital Library for Earth System Education: . 4. The :

lesson-plans/. 5. Virtual trip in the class:

default.aspx. 6. Education World: . 7. Teacher Resource Exchange: . 8. LEARN NC:

aids. 9. HOTCHALK: . 10. : .

The table generalizes the information on the lesson plan, given in repositories, taking into consideration the form way of lesson plan submission. It has been noticed that each repository uses only part of information elements given in learning object metadata. We shall list the most usable ones (referring to the number of repositories that use this element):

- title of the lesson plan ? 10, - short description ? 8, - contributors ? 10, - age Range or Grade Level ? 10, - classification (subject) ? 9.

Other elements are not so often repeating, they define certain peculiarities, related as usual us to specific needs. However, the presentation of namely these specific elements in the learning object metadata allow us to achieve a more accurate result of the search.

A further analysis has shown that all the lesson plans are described in the colloquial language in a free style. Four repositories present lesson plans on the internet, seven allow saving a file of the lesson plan, and four repositories suggest using templates of the lesson plan.

3. Analysis of Templates of Lesson Plans

After a comparative analysis of data provided by the European learning object repositories, it has been established that four (out of ten) repositories use a template of the lesson plan. These are: HOTCHALK, Virtual trip in the class (in the sequel VKK), LEARN NC and EDUCATION WORLD. Table 2 illustrates an exhaustive comparison of templates of lesson plans.

The repository HOTCHALK presents a template of the lesson plan as a recommendation, and, independent of this template, each lesson plan is structured. VKK repository presents a template of the lesson plan in ppt format: the structure off all the lesson plans is the same, however, in order to look over it, we need to use additional tool. LEARN NC

Technology-Based Lesson Plans: Preparation and Description

221

Table 2 Comparison of lesson plan templates

HOTCHALK

VKK

Lesson Plan Title ? Concept/Topic To Teach ?

Title Brief Description Subjects ?

General Goal(s) Specific Objectives Required Materials

Step-By-Step Procedures

Anticipatory Set:Lead-In Plan For Independent Practice Closure:?Reflect Anticipatory Set Assessment Based On Objectives Standards Addressed

Learning objectives ? Learning material and means Project context and planing ? ?

?

Assessment

Conforming to the curriculum

Adaptations: For Students With Learning Disabilities Extensions (For Gifted Students) Possible Connections To Other Subjects ?

?

?

?

?

?

Age range or grade level Keywords Authors

?

List of references

used

?

Pictures of a class

?

Survey of student's

work

?

Information on a

teacher or school

LEARN NC

EDUCATION WORLD

? Summary of activities ? Time required for the lesion Learning outcomes ? Materials/Resources

Title Brief Description Subjects ?

Objectives ? Materials Needed

Activities

Lesson Plan

?

?

?

?

?

?

Assessment

Assessment

North Carolina Curriculum Alignment ?

National Standards ?

?

?

?

?

?

Grades

?

Keywords

?

Lesson Plan Source,

Submitted By

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

and EDUCATION WORD repositories provide a template based on internet technologies: the structure of all the lesson plans is the same, they can be quickly and comfortably looked over with a browser.

222

S. Kubilinskiene, V. Dagiene

As a generalization, note that:

? Template elements, not grounded on internet technologies, do not interact with the elements in metadata schemes, therefore information should be given twice: separately both in the template elements and in metadata elements.

? If the template of a lesson plan is not used, then the structure of each plan is different and the exhaustiveness level is indefinite.

? A part of lesson plans are presented together with the learning material, used in a lesson. The teaching material or means are `concealed' in lesson plans ? it is impossible to find them in repositories and to use them in other learning context or rely on them while applying other teaching methods.

? The whole lesson plan is comprised of the following elements: title of a lesson, age grade, learning objects, prior knowledge of user, time of learning, learning resources, other required means, teaching and learning methods, description of activities (step-by-step procedures), scope, assessment, reflection, title of the subject, correspondence to the teaching curriculum.

The analysis of templates of lesson plans illustrates that only some of the elements of template are present in all the templates of lesson plans, namely:

? learning objects:

explicit and grounded lesson objects to be taught; expected results ? what a student should learn or do; student's aims and needs; objects conforming the curricula;

? learning (teaching) material and means; ? step-by-step procedure of activities; ? assessment.

The main component of a lesson plan were identified. With a view to avoid information dubbing, it is reason able to separate metadata elements from description elements. The separated metadata elements could be presented and used in different learning object repositories. They are especially useful in search of lesson plans. Both components are inseparable parts of a lesson plan, because the metadata elements, in line with analysis of templates, make up the description of a lesson plan.

Fig. 1. Components of a lesson plan.

Technology-Based Lesson Plans: Preparation and Description

223

Table 3 Review of metadata standards

Standards

Number of elements

Application profiles Remark

Learning Object Metadata (IEEE LOM)

Dublin Core Metadata (DC)

MAchineReadable Cataloging (MARC21) UNIMARC

Records consist of 80 hierarchic structure fields that are classified into 9 categories. Divided into 2 parts: ? data model (1484.12.1-2002) enables to achieve the maximal data modulation, interoperability and applicability and is capable to extend and add new data elements if needed; ? data model (1484.12.1-2002) enables to achieve the maximal data modulation, interoperability and applicability and is capable to extend and add new data elements if needed; ? technical representation of metadata in XML format. The standard model is of two levels: simple and improved. The simple Dublin Core model consists of 15 elements, whole the refined one includes 3 elements in addition. DC standard 2003-11-26 was approved by the International Standardization Organization (ISO 15836:2003). The records are composed of three elements: the record structure, the content designation, and the data content of the record. The UNIMARC format, like MARC, involves three elements of the bibliographic record: the record structure, the content designation and the data content. The whole description consists of notation definition, separators and sub-field codes.

CanCore (2002); UK LOM Core (UK Learning ..., 2003); LOM LRE AP (The EUN ...); SingCore (Chew, 2003).

Education Network Australia (EdNA) (Education Network . . .)

?

?

Designed to describe the various resources.

Designed to describe the various resources.

Designed to create bibliographic records. Designed to create bibliographic records.

4. Analysis of LO Metadata Standards

The key aim of metadata is to facilitate the search for LO's, assessment, retrieval and usage. LO metadata are created using standards or specifications and their applied educational models. Therefore it is necessary to determine which standard or specification will allow to reflect the peculiarities of lesson plans. One of the most frequently used metadata standards at present are as follows: Learning Object Metadata (IEEE LOM; IEEE Standard ..., 2002), Dublin Core Metadata (DC) (Dublin ... ), MAchine-Readable Cataloging (MARC21) (MARK standards ...), UNIMARC (Intenational ..., 1994). Table 3 shows systematized information on standards.

In summary, we can affirm state that DC, MARC21 and UNIMARC metadata standard models suit quite well to describe the bibliographic part of digital resource, while

224

S. Kubilinskiene, V. Dagiene

Table 4 Template of a lesson plan

LOM category

LOM element no.

LOM element

Template-description of a lesson plan

Name of field

Value of field

General

1.2

Educational 5.7

Educational 5.10

5.12

Educational 5.9

Relation

7.1

7.2.2 7.2.1.2

Title Typical Age Range Description

Educational. Prerequisites

Typical Learning Time Kind

Description Entry

Title of lesson

Age Range

min

max

Objectives

Student must:

Expectation

Necessary prior knowledge of the end of user Learning time min. Titles of digital learning resources (LO) used at the lesson

Link address to LO used at the lesson Other required means Description of activities

Assesment

http://

Activities Teacher and/or support role

Educational 5.13

Scope

Teacher's

reflection or

comments Scope

General

1.5

Classification 9.1

Keyword Purpose

Keywords Subjects

9.2.2.1 9.2.2.2 Classification 9.1

Id Entry Purpose

9.2.2.1 9.2.2.2 Classification 9.1

Id Entry Purpose

9.2.2.1 9.2.2.2

Id Entry

Conforming to the curriculum

Learning (teaching) methods used at the lesson

Multi- Date type plicity

0..1 0..1 0..1 0..1 0..*(10)

LangString LangString LangString LangString LangString

0..1 Character String

0..1 Controlled vocabulary (LOM LRE)

0..1 LangString

0..1 Character String

0..1 Character

String

1

Character

String

0..1 Character String

0..1 Character String

0..*(10) 1

0..1 0..1 1

0..1 0..1 1

Controlled vocabulary (new) LangString

Controlled vocabulary (LOM v.1) Character String Taxonomy of subject Controlled vocabulary (LOM v.1)

Character String Taxonomy of competency Controlled vocabulary (new)

0..1 Character String

0..1 Taxonomy of teaching methods

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download